Guest guest Report post Posted August 2, 2005 There has been some discussion about whether Buddha is an incarnation of the Lord. SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the nAma-s 787 to 810 in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to this interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa avatAram that was meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach Him in this birth because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of punishment metted out to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them from the path that will lead them to Him. SrI V. V. Ramanujan refers to the AzhvAr pASuram "kaLLa vEDattaik koNDu pOyp puram pukkavARum kalandu aSurarai uLLam bedam SeiddiTTu uyir uNDa upAya'ngaL". The Buddha incarnation is not one of the incarnations that we worship. The detailed write-up of SrI BhaTTar's interpretation for the nAma-s from SrI vishNu sahasra nAma for this segment can be found in the postings on SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam. It should be clearly understood that this incrnation is NOT for worship by us, but for the sole purpose of BhagavAn misleading those whom He does not wish to bless with the right path in this birth. A vague example to illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the Mohini avatAram that the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the demons. There is a reference to Buddha and Buddha matham in SrImad rAmAyaNa, ayodhyA kANDa 109.35 - yathA hi coraH sa tathA hi buddhaH... (rAma addresses jAbAli and refers to buddha as a cheat and the buddha matham as a non-vedic religion). Thus, there is a reference to buddha and the buddhist religion even in rAmAyaNa, and so the reference to buddha in SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam may not be to the buddha that lived in our times. SrI v.n. vedAnta deSikan notes that there is a lot of difference in interpretation of nammAzhvAr's pASuram in this context, and he deems it fit to leave the discussion at a superficial level for AzhvAr's pASuram. The same approach seems relevant for the issue at hand, except to state that there was an incarnation of the Lord that taught the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading those with demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 6, 2005 > SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the nAma-s 787 to 810 > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to this > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa avatAram that was > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach Him in this birth > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of punishment metted out > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them from the path that I would strongly disagree with this interpretation. We might be punished in any way for our bad karmas ... but god would never mislead anybody. He is the most merciful. His way of punishing would be anything else but to mislead you. For then we would also say that Jesus Christ was also an avataram to mislead more people and the same with other religions which came into being. There have been many great rishis, saints in this world and no doubt Gautam Buddha was a great saint or maybe even a avataram. But it is not right here to say that he came here into this world to mislead people as a planned way to punish those who have wronged. >A vague example to > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the Mohini avatAram that > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the demons. Yes Mohini avataram was to deceive the Asuras (dont call them Demons) but it was more to create a diversion than to mislead. Mohini did not come to mislead the Asuras into praying another god. She did not weave a spell of another thelogy or another god. The Asuras knew of Maha Vishnu and i believe their level of understanding of GOD is far advanced than any of us here on earth. I would be extremely happy if i were to be even 0.00001% of the bhakta Ravana was , even though he was an Asura. > except to state that there was an incarnation of the Lord that taught > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading those with > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. All asuras prayed to our gods. they were mislead by power which they gained as boons from our gods. The buddhist religion does not talk of giving or taking power and granting boons. Please read into this link.. http://biblia.com/theology/buddhism.htm No where would you see the followers of buddhism have demonic qualities or the will to fight, opress etc. Arvind Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 7, 2005 Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the Lord. He was an ordinary person, a prince belonging to the Sakhya dynasty, who realized the cause of sorrow in the world..i.e. in other words, he was Enlightened. Hinduism in medieval India had managed to accumulate enough evils, thanks to the priestly class who were using their power, and knowledge of the religious scriptures, to appropriately distort them, and suppress people in the lower strata of the society. These evils were Caste System, animal sacrifices, Sati..to name a few. In other words...the correct term to use for the religion would be 'Brahmanism' not 'Hinduism'. This situation formed a fertile period for the rise of religions like Buddhism and Jainism. These strove to remove the strict and illogical rules binding the society, remove sorrow, and lead people who were 'stuck' with the many meaningless Hindu rituals (which they themselves didn't understand) on a correct, practical path. Buddha preached in Pali, a language the masses could understand. What is the use of teaching in Sanksrit when the common man doesnt understand it and when you restrict him from learning Sanskrit? The people in India were immediately attracted to this new religion and it became popular. The Brahministic Hinduism, immediately seeing a threat to it's status and dominance, reacted by proclaiming Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. Yes, the comman man was cheated, because in due course, Brahminism managed to wipe out Buddhism from it's land of birth. As always, we Indians seem to take in the wrong things..and that explains the reason for our eternal backwardness. Countries like Japan, Korea immediately imbibed the good qualities present in Buddha's teachings...teachings of goodness to everyone, leading a simple and practical life. After reading your article, I have lost whatever respect I had for the ancient people who wrote the treatises you mentioned. vtel --- champakam <champakam wrote: > There has been some discussion about whether Buddha > is an incarnation > of the Lord. SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the > nAma-s 787 to 810 > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to > this > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa > avatAram that was > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach > Him in this birth > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of > punishment metted out > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them > from the path that > will lead them to Him. SrI V. V. Ramanujan refers > to the AzhvAr > pASuram "kaLLa vEDattaik koNDu pOyp puram pukkavARum > kalandu aSurarai > uLLam bedam SeiddiTTu uyir uNDa upAya'ngaL". The > Buddha incarnation > is not one of the incarnations that we worship. > > The detailed write-up of SrI BhaTTar's > interpretation for the nAma-s > from SrI vishNu sahasra nAma for this segment can be > found in the > postings on SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam. It should be > clearly > understood that this incrnation is NOT for worship > by us, but for the > sole purpose of BhagavAn misleading those whom He > does not wish to > bless with the right path in this birth. A vague > example to > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the > Mohini avatAram that > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the > demons. > > There is a reference to Buddha and Buddha matham in > SrImad rAmAyaNa, > ayodhyA kANDa 109.35 - yathA hi coraH sa tathA hi > buddhaH... (rAma > addresses jAbAli and refers to buddha as a cheat and > the buddha > matham as a non-vedic religion). Thus, there is a > reference to > buddha and the buddhist religion even in rAmAyaNa, > and so the > reference to buddha in SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam may > not be to the > buddha that lived in our times. > > SrI v.n. vedAnta deSikan notes that there is a lot > of difference in > interpretation of nammAzhvAr's pASuram in this > context, and he deems > it fit to leave the discussion at a superficial > level for AzhvAr's > pASuram. The same approach seems relevant for the > issue at hand, > except to state that there was an incarnation of the > Lord that taught > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading > those with > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. > > -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 9, 2005 Arvind swami, This kind of forceful authority is not for us. please. we are born to be servants of the servants of him. Now, coming to Bhattar, i donot have the authority to question, unless i know the full background of the things. Now asking people to go thro buddism html is no use. We donot accept buddha as avatar. Buddha theory was more like charvaka. later on what has come of buddism is a study in itself. you cannot find an iota of what we find as buddist today in his teachings. buddism like janism and christianity have been buried with their founders. dasan/raghavan Arvind Rangan <arvind wrote: > SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the nAma-s 787 to 810 > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to this > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa avatAram that was > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach Him in this birth > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of punishment metted out > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them from the path that I would strongly disagree with this interpretation. We might be punished in any way for our bad karmas ... but god would never mislead anybody. He is the most merciful. His way of punishing would be anything else but to mislead you. For then we would also say that Jesus Christ was also an avataram to mislead more people and the same with other religions which came into being. There have been many great rishis, saints in this world and no doubt Gautam Buddha was a great saint or maybe even a avataram. But it is not right here to say that he came here into this world to mislead people as a planned way to punish those who have wronged. >A vague example to > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the Mohini avatAram that > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the demons. Yes Mohini avataram was to deceive the Asuras (dont call them Demons) but it was more to create a diversion than to mislead. Mohini did not come to mislead the Asuras into praying another god. She did not weave a spell of another thelogy or another god. The Asuras knew of Maha Vishnu and i believe their level of understanding of GOD is far advanced than any of us here on earth. I would be extremely happy if i were to be even 0.00001% of the bhakta Ravana was , even though he was an Asura. > except to state that there was an incarnation of the Lord that taught > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading those with > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. All asuras prayed to our gods. they were mislead by power which they gained as boons from our gods. The buddhist religion does not talk of giving or taking power and granting boons. Please read into this link.. http://biblia.com/theology/buddhism.htm No where would you see the followers of buddhism have demonic qualities or the will to fight, opress etc. Arvind Different religions beliefs Religious education Beyond belief Jewish belief Jehovah witness beliefs Visit your group "" on the web. Start your day with - make it your home page Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 12, 2005 Let us not forget the basic principles of Sanatana Dharma: 1. Let noble thoughts come to us from the whole world (aa no bhadraah kratavo yantu vishvatah) 2. Truth is one names are many (ekam sadvipraah bahudaa vadanti) 3. World is one family (vasudhaiva kuTumbhakam) 4. One who realizes that lord's support is upon him(her) is indeed sustained (yopaam aayatanam veda aayatanavaan bhavati) 5. Everything is permeated by the lord. Cherish your share with detachment and without envy. Buddhism, and Jainism solemnize one aspect of sanatana dharma (jnaana maarga and advaita); whereas the Abrahamic religions solemnize on another aspect of sanatana dharma (bhakti/surrender/un clinching faith and dualism). However, sects within the body of sanaatana dharma tend to cling to very narrow views and tend to rationalize the scriptures to fit their narrow views. dAsan K.S. tAtAchAr Vijaya Raghavan <svrvan Arvind Rangan <arvind; ; champakam <champakam Tue, 9 Aug 2005 04:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Re: Buddha incarnation. Arvind swami, This kind of forceful authority is not for us. please. we are born to be servants of the servants of him. Now, coming to Bhattar, i donot have the authority to question, unless i know the full background of the things. Now asking people to go thro buddism html is no use. We donot accept buddha as avatar. Buddha theory was more like charvaka. later on what has come of buddism is a study in itself. you cannot find an iota of what we find as buddist today in his teachings. buddism like janism and christianity have been buried with their founders. dasan/raghavan Arvind Rangan <arvind wrote: > SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the nAma-s 787 to 810 > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to this > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa avatAram that was > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach Him in this birth > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of punishment metted out > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them from the path that I would strongly disagree with this interpretation. We might be punished in any way for our bad karmas ... but god would never mislead anybody. He is the most merciful. His way of punishing would be anything else but to mislead you. For then we would also say that Jesus Christ was also an avataram to mislead more people and the same with other religions which came into being. There have been many great rishis, saints in this world and no doubt Gautam Buddha was a great saint or maybe even a avataram. But it is not right here to say that he came here into this world to mislead people as a planned way to punish those who have wronged. >A vague example to > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the Mohini avatAram that > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the demons. Yes Mohini avataram was to deceive the Asuras (dont call them Demons) but it was more to create a diversion than to mislead. Mohini did not come to mislead the Asuras into praying another god. She did not weave a spell of another thelogy or another god. The Asuras knew of Maha Vishnu and i believe their level of understanding of GOD is far advanced than any of us here on earth. I would be extremely happy if i were to be even 0.00001% of the bhakta Ravana was , even though he was an Asura. > except to state that there was an incarnation of the Lord that taught > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading those with > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. All asuras prayed to our gods. they were mislead by power which they gained as boons from our gods. The buddhist religion does not talk of giving or taking power and granting boons. Please read into this link.. http://biblia.com/theology/buddhism.htm No where would you see the followers of buddhism have demonic qualities or the will to fight, opress etc. Arvind Different religions beliefs Religious education Beyond belief Jewish belief Jehovah witness beliefs Visit your group "" on the web. Start your day with - make it your home page Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 14, 2005 Let me react to the writings of VTel and Krishnamachari 1. Vtel is trying to make decisions on Avataram - as his statement indicates "Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the lord" by using rational and historical assessment of times and people of India. I am not supporting blindly Brahmanism or the caste system or anything here. It is not entirely possible to draw philosophical conclusions based on such analysis. How can one know about Lord and his incarnations clearly? Unless an aspirant is a very realized - as indicated by "janma karma ca me divyam evam yo vetti tattvatah tyaktva deham punar janma naiti mameti so'rjuna" which means "if one knows the real nature of incarnation and action of me (Lord Krishna), he will leave this body, reach ME, and never will be born again, O Arjuna" -in fourth chapter of Bhagawadgita. Hence Vtel's statement "Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the lord" can be accepted only if Vtel is enlightened to this extent stated in bhagawadgita. 2. Krishnamachari is only summarizing the views of traditional classical interpreters of Vedantic literature. The problem facing these writers is: a) it is true that Buddha is mentioned in many works like sahasranamam, pancharathra samhitas etc. (note Buddha is included in 39 incarnations mentioned in the pancha rathra samhitas). Even gita govinda mentions Buddha. b) buddhistic philosophy is different from Vedanta. c) how to make sense out of the issues: a) that Buddha may be an incarnation of Lord based on certain texts, and b) if his philosophy does not fit into Bhagawadgita and other major texts and hence there seems to be problem. This is the problem facing vedantic writers. Hence different answers are suggested. Since the answers to these questions are difficult we have to take things in a way suitable to our intellect. My personal view is "mahajano yena gatah sa panthah" - follow the great leaders like our Alwars and Acharyas, not blindly but with an open mind. Don't ignore historical issues. Answers will come to us when we get deeper knowledge. Statements from VTEL such as : ----------" After reading your article, I have lost whatever respect I had for the ancient people who wrote the treatises you mentioned." ------------ Is an emotional and far reaching statement written without appropriate analysis. Adiyen, Krishna Kashyap [] On Behalf Of vee tel Saturday, August 06, 2005 5:13 PM Re: Buddha incarnation. Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the Lord. He was an ordinary person, a prince belonging to the Sakhya dynasty, who realized the cause of sorrow in the world..i.e. in other words, he was Enlightened. Hinduism in medieval India had managed to accumulate enough evils, thanks to the priestly class who were using their power, and knowledge of the religious scriptures, to appropriately distort them, and suppress people in the lower strata of the society. These evils were Caste System, animal sacrifices, Sati..to name a few. In other words...the correct term to use for the religion would be 'Brahmanism' not 'Hinduism'. This situation formed a fertile period for the rise of religions like Buddhism and Jainism. These strove to remove the strict and illogical rules binding the society, remove sorrow, and lead people who were 'stuck' with the many meaningless Hindu rituals (which they themselves didn't understand) on a correct, practical path. Buddha preached in Pali, a language the masses could understand. What is the use of teaching in Sanksrit when the common man doesnt understand it and when you restrict him from learning Sanskrit? The people in India were immediately attracted to this new religion and it became popular. The Brahministic Hinduism, immediately seeing a threat to it's status and dominance, reacted by proclaiming Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. Yes, the comman man was cheated, because in due course, Brahminism managed to wipe out Buddhism from it's land of birth. As always, we Indians seem to take in the wrong things..and that explains the reason for our eternal backwardness. Countries like Japan, Korea immediately imbibed the good qualities present in Buddha's teachings...teachings of goodness to everyone, leading a simple and practical life. After reading your article, I have lost whatever respect I had for the ancient people who wrote the treatises you mentioned. vtel --- champakam <champakam wrote: > There has been some discussion about whether Buddha > is an incarnation > of the Lord. SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the > nAma-s 787 to 810 > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to > this > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa > avatAram that was > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach > Him in this birth > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of > punishment metted out > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them > from the path that > will lead them to Him. SrI V. V. Ramanujan refers > to the AzhvAr > pASuram "kaLLa vEDattaik koNDu pOyp puram pukkavARum > kalandu aSurarai > uLLam bedam SeiddiTTu uyir uNDa upAya'ngaL". The > Buddha incarnation > is not one of the incarnations that we worship. > > The detailed write-up of SrI BhaTTar's > interpretation for the nAma-s > from SrI vishNu sahasra nAma for this segment can be > found in the > postings on SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam. It should be > clearly > understood that this incrnation is NOT for worship > by us, but for the > sole purpose of BhagavAn misleading those whom He > does not wish to > bless with the right path in this birth. A vague > example to > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the > Mohini avatAram that > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the > demons. > > There is a reference to Buddha and Buddha matham in > SrImad rAmAyaNa, > ayodhyA kANDa 109.35 - yathA hi coraH sa tathA hi > buddhaH... (rAma > addresses jAbAli and refers to buddha as a cheat and > the buddha > matham as a non-vedic religion). Thus, there is a > reference to > buddha and the buddhist religion even in rAmAyaNa, > and so the > reference to buddha in SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam may > not be to the > buddha that lived in our times. > > SrI v.n. vedAnta deSikan notes that there is a lot > of difference in > interpretation of nammAzhvAr's pASuram in this > context, and he deems > it fit to leave the discussion at a superficial > level for AzhvAr's > pASuram. The same approach seems relevant for the > issue at hand, > except to state that there was an incarnation of the > Lord that taught > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading > those with > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. > > -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Links Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 17, 2005 Seems to be an emotional outpour from a believer from the other camp. Sri vaishnavam (of Sri Ramanuja's lineage) does not take buddha as an avatar. To this extent there is an agreement with the objector. But many other vaishnava traditions do believe buddha as an avatar of vishnu. This is just a small concession perhaps to win converts. In general, there are not that many references to buddha and jinas in the puranAs. There are only a few references, and they are occasionally quoted to support theories. For example, there is one reference on buddha in rAmAyanam, one in Srimad bhagavatam, and a few in other places. The reference in ramAyanam seems to be a harsh word to JabAli from Sri Rama when the former urges the latter to return to Ayodhya. Sri Rama points out the former's arguments are avaidikic (against vedam), since he (Sri Rama) is trying to illustrate that the word (promise to Kaikeyi) should be kept (satyam vada, darmam chara, mAthru devo bhava, pithtu devo bhava.) The quote in Srimad bhAgacatam seems to be out of place but it is taken to support that buddha is an avatar of vishnu. In many other places, the strong differences between buddism and vedic sampradAyam and peoples' philosophical attitudes in the old days are adumbrated. We may take these references to be more as a poetic outpouring rather as certain truths. In general this poetry is very small compared to the number of lines of poetry written illustrating vishnu tattvam. On the other hand, buddha is cherished as a nAmA of the Lord even in the South Indian vishnu nAmavalis. This indicates an old connection between the faiths. The central contention with the buddism stems from its denial or silence on the concept of god and rejection of vedas. Obviously people from the vedic camps would take issue with this. It is like Abrahamic religions trying to say that only they are authentic. The core principles of god-centric religions are in the vedas, and one can logically see a need for god to explain the basic existence of everything in the universe. In scientific terms, we have vacuum and a lot of matter, and sentient beings on the top of this pyramid. If one deeply looks at this order, one cannot stop from agreeing with many passages in the vedam that emphasize the need for god or a power identical to It in order explain the origin of everything. No one 'create' the mass of matter and sentience emerging from it without the Divine Will. God is a mathematical singularity that is a spring of everything. This singularity is the primordial sacrificer extolled in the vedas and worshipped in the AgamAs. This is a really a beautiful thing in the middle of the universe and would continue to vex the theologists, agnostics, atheists, and scientists for eternity. dAsan, RTV Varadarajan , vee tel <v_tel001> wrote: > > Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the Lord. > He was an ordinary person, a prince belonging to the > Sakhya dynasty, who realized the cause of sorrow in > the world..i.e. in other words, he was Enlightened. > > Hinduism in medieval India had managed to accumulate > enough evils, thanks to the priestly class who were > using their power, and knowledge of the religious > scriptures, to appropriately distort them, and > suppress people in the lower strata of the society. > These evils were Caste System, animal sacrifices, > Sati..to name a few. In other words...the correct term > to use for the religion would be 'Brahmanism' not > 'Hinduism'. > > This situation formed a fertile period for the rise of > religions like Buddhism and Jainism. These strove to > remove the strict and illogical rules binding the > society, remove sorrow, and lead people who were > 'stuck' with the many meaningless Hindu rituals (which > they themselves didn't understand) on a correct, > practical path. Buddha preached in Pali, a language > the masses could understand. What is the use of > teaching in Sanksrit when the common man doesnt > understand it and when you restrict him from learning > Sanskrit? > > The people in India were immediately attracted to this > new religion and it became popular. The Brahministic > Hinduism, immediately seeing a threat to it's status > and dominance, reacted by proclaiming Buddha as an > avatar of Vishnu. > Yes, the comman man was cheated, because in due > course, Brahminism managed to wipe out Buddhism from > it's land of birth. > > As always, we Indians seem to take in the wrong > things..and that explains the reason for our eternal > backwardness. Countries like Japan, Korea immediately > imbibed the good qualities present in Buddha's > teachings...teachings of goodness to everyone, leading > a simple and practical life. > > After reading your article, I have lost whatever > respect I had for the ancient people who wrote the > treatises you mentioned. > > vtel > > > --- champakam <champakam> wrote: > > > There has been some discussion about whether Buddha > > is an incarnation > > of the Lord. SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the > > nAma-s 787 to 810 > > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to > > this > > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa > > avatAram that was > > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach > > Him in this birth > > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of > > punishment metted out > > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them > > from the path that > > will lead them to Him. SrI V. V. Ramanujan refers > > to the AzhvAr > > pASuram "kaLLa vEDattaik koNDu pOyp puram pukkavARum > > kalandu aSurarai > > uLLam bedam SeiddiTTu uyir uNDa upAya'ngaL". The > > Buddha incarnation > > is not one of the incarnations that we worship. > > > > The detailed write-up of SrI BhaTTar's > > interpretation for the nAma-s > > from SrI vishNu sahasra nAma for this segment can be > > found in the > > postings on SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam. It should be > > clearly > > understood that this incrnation is NOT for worship > > by us, but for the > > sole purpose of BhagavAn misleading those whom He > > does not wish to > > bless with the right path in this birth. A vague > > example to > > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the > > Mohini avatAram that > > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the > > demons. > > > > There is a reference to Buddha and Buddha matham in > > SrImad rAmAyaNa, > > ayodhyA kANDa 109.35 - yathA hi coraH sa tathA hi > > buddhaH... (rAma > > addresses jAbAli and refers to buddha as a cheat and > > the buddha > > matham as a non-vedic religion). Thus, there is a > > reference to > > buddha and the buddhist religion even in rAmAyaNa, > > and so the > > reference to buddha in SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam may > > not be to the > > buddha that lived in our times. > > > > SrI v.n. vedAnta deSikan notes that there is a lot > > of difference in > > interpretation of nammAzhvAr's pASuram in this > > context, and he deems > > it fit to leave the discussion at a superficial > > level for AzhvAr's > > pASuram. The same approach seems relevant for the > > issue at hand, > > except to state that there was an incarnation of the > > Lord that taught > > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading > > those with > > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. > > > > -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 23, 2005 >> On the other hand, buddha is cherished as a nAmA of the Lord even in the South Indian vishnu nAmavalis. This indicates an old connection between the faiths. << Buddha, Gautama, Shuddodhana, Siddartha, etc were in the pre Buddhist Hindu vocab. Thus, it is amusing if someone says that Buddhism founder is in the Vishnu Sahasranama. KS. tAtAchAr kc <rtvrajan Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:41:36 -0000 Re: Buddha incarnation. Seems to be an emotional outpour from a believer from the other camp. Sri vaishnavam (of Sri Ramanuja's lineage) does not take buddha as an avatar. To this extent there is an agreement with the objector. But many other vaishnava traditions do believe buddha as an avatar of vishnu. This is just a small concession perhaps to win converts. In general, there are not that many references to buddha and jinas in the puranAs. There are only a few references, and they are occasionally quoted to support theories. For example, there is one reference on buddha in rAmAyanam, one in Srimad bhagavatam, and a few in other places. The reference in ramAyanam seems to be a harsh word to JabAli from Sri Rama when the former urges the latter to return to Ayodhya. Sri Rama points out the former's arguments are avaidikic (against vedam), since he (Sri Rama) is trying to illustrate that the word (promise to Kaikeyi) should be kept (satyam vada, darmam chara, mAthru devo bhava, pithtu devo bhava.) The quote in Srimad bhAgacatam seems to be out of place but it is taken to support that buddha is an avatar of vishnu. In many other places, the strong differences between buddism and vedic sampradAyam and peoples' philosophical attitudes in the old days are adumbrated. We may take these references to be more as a poetic outpouring rather as certain truths. In general this poetry is very small compared to the number of lines of poetry written illustrating vishnu tattvam. On the other hand, buddha is cherished as a nAmA of the Lord even in the South Indian vishnu nAmavalis. This indicates an old connection between the faiths. The central contention with the buddism stems from its denial or silence on the concept of god and rejection of vedas. Obviously people from the vedic camps would take issue with this. It is like Abrahamic religions trying to say that only they are authentic. The core principles of god-centric religions are in the vedas, and one can logically see a need for god to explain the basic existence of everything in the universe. In scientific terms, we have vacuum and a lot of matter, and sentient beings on the top of this pyramid. If one deeply looks at this order, one cannot stop from agreeing with many passages in the vedam that emphasize the need for god or a power identical to It in order explain the origin of everything. No one 'create' the mass of matter and sentience emerging from it without the Divine Will. God is a mathematical singularity that is a spring of everything. This singularity is the primordial sacrificer extolled in the vedas and worshipped in the AgamAs. This is a really a beautiful thing in the middle of the universe and would continue to vex the theologists, agnostics, atheists, and scientists for eternity. dAsan, RTV Varadarajan , vee tel <v_tel001> wrote: > > Buddha was NOT an incarnation of the Lord. > He was an ordinary person, a prince belonging to the > Sakhya dynasty, who realized the cause of sorrow in > the world..i.e. in other words, he was Enlightened. > > Hinduism in medieval India had managed to accumulate > enough evils, thanks to the priestly class who were > using their power, and knowledge of the religious > scriptures, to appropriately distort them, and > suppress people in the lower strata of the society. > These evils were Caste System, animal sacrifices, > Sati..to name a few. In other words...the correct term > to use for the religion would be 'Brahmanism' not > 'Hinduism'. > > This situation formed a fertile period for the rise of > religions like Buddhism and Jainism. These strove to > remove the strict and illogical rules binding the > society, remove sorrow, and lead people who were > 'stuck' with the many meaningless Hindu rituals (which > they themselves didn't understand) on a correct, > practical path. Buddha preached in Pali, a language > the masses could understand. What is the use of > teaching in Sanksrit when the common man doesnt > understand it and when you restrict him from learning > Sanskrit? > > The people in India were immediately attracted to this > new religion and it became popular. The Brahministic > Hinduism, immediately seeing a threat to it's status > and dominance, reacted by proclaiming Buddha as an > avatar of Vishnu. > Yes, the comman man was cheated, because in due > course, Brahminism managed to wipe out Buddhism from > it's land of birth. > > As always, we Indians seem to take in the wrong > things..and that explains the reason for our eternal > backwardness. Countries like Japan, Korea immediately > imbibed the good qualities present in Buddha's > teachings...teachings of goodness to everyone, leading > a simple and practical life. > > After reading your article, I have lost whatever > respect I had for the ancient people who wrote the > treatises you mentioned. > > vtel > > > --- champakam <champakam> wrote: > > > There has been some discussion about whether Buddha > > is an incarnation > > of the Lord. SrI ParASara BhaTTar interprets the > > nAma-s 787 to 810 > > in terms of the Buddha incarnation. According to > > this > > interpretation, the Buddha incarnation was a kapaTa > > avatAram that was > > meant to mislead those who do not deserve to reach > > Him in this birth > > because of their bad deeds, and it is a form of > > punishment metted out > > to these folks by the Lord, namely to mislead them > > from the path that > > will lead them to Him. SrI V. V. Ramanujan refers > > to the AzhvAr > > pASuram "kaLLa vEDattaik koNDu pOyp puram pukkavARum > > kalandu aSurarai > > uLLam bedam SeiddiTTu uyir uNDa upAya'ngaL". The > > Buddha incarnation > > is not one of the incarnations that we worship. > > > > The detailed write-up of SrI BhaTTar's > > interpretation for the nAma-s > > from SrI vishNu sahasra nAma for this segment can be > > found in the > > postings on SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam. It should be > > clearly > > understood that this incrnation is NOT for worship > > by us, but for the > > sole purpose of BhagavAn misleading those whom He > > does not wish to > > bless with the right path in this birth. A vague > > example to > > illustrate the concept of kapaTa avatAram is the > > Mohini avatAram that > > the Lord took for the sole purpose of deceiving the > > demons. > > > > There is a reference to Buddha and Buddha matham in > > SrImad rAmAyaNa, > > ayodhyA kANDa 109.35 - yathA hi coraH sa tathA hi > > buddhaH... (rAma > > addresses jAbAli and refers to buddha as a cheat and > > the buddha > > matham as a non-vedic religion). Thus, there is a > > reference to > > buddha and the buddhist religion even in rAmAyaNa, > > and so the > > reference to buddha in SrI vishNu sahasra nAmam may > > not be to the > > buddha that lived in our times. > > > > SrI v.n. vedAnta deSikan notes that there is a lot > > of difference in > > interpretation of nammAzhvAr's pASuram in this > > context, and he deems > > it fit to leave the discussion at a superficial > > level for AzhvAr's > > pASuram. The same approach seems relevant for the > > issue at hand, > > except to state that there was an incarnation of the > > Lord that taught > > the Buddhist religion for the purpose of misleading > > those with > > demonic qualities or Asuric tendencies. > > > > -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
